1

[Note: Special appreciation to Kay Hale for the use of excerpts from his 1986 article on the Spassky visit to Dallas, link below.]

In the early summer of 1986 I received a call from my friend Hal Bogner, a chess organizer from California. Hal told me of a chess tour of the U.S. planned by former World Champion Boris Spassky. Hal explained that we could arrange a simultaneous exhibition in Dallas for

Grandmasters I Have Known: Spassky

by Lou Hays

FEBRUARY 2017

Editor: Tom Braunlich Asst. Ed. Rebecca Rutledge

Published the 1st of each month.

Send story submissions and tournament reports, etc., by the

15th of the previous month to mailto:tom.braunlich@cox.net

http://ocfchess.org Oklahoma Chess

Foundation Register Online for Free

Chess News and Chess History for Oklahoma

“Oklahoma’s Official Chess Bulletin Covering Oklahoma Chess on a Regular Schedule Since 1982”

©2016 All rights reserved.

In This Issue: •

Lou Hays Remembers

Spassky •

Cope on Waiting for a

Blunder •

Ciaran Annotates

• Plus

News Bites, Game of the

Month, Puzzles,

Top 25 List, Tournament

Reports, and more.

Howard Zhong

This month’s issue is packed with so much chess news I had to delay some items until next issue! Thanks to everyone who has been contributing! We start with the next of Lou Hays’ series on grandmasters he has known — Spassky. We have the first of a new series by John Cope, and Ciaran O’Hare shows the depth possible in ICCF correspondence play in some remarkable new annotations. We have news stories about Howard Zhong and Alex Relyea, plus other news, tourney reports, and more. Enjoy. — TB

2

2

$50 per board ($110 in 2017 dollars!) for up to fifty boards. Local sponsors would have to cover a portion of Spassky’s travel expenses ($200) and provide housing. Boris Spassky? This was an offer I couldn’t refuse.

The circumstances couldn’t have been better for me. Spassky would fly to Dallas from Los Angeles on Tuesday, September 2, the day after Labor Day, the very same day a friend and I would be returning from a chess tournament in San Diego. We booked ourselves on the same flight as Spassky.

NM Mike Richards, my friend, of course had a long endgame in his last round in San Diego. By the time he finished and we packed up to go to LA, it was already late evening. We managed three hours of sleep and stumbled to the L.A. airport by 6:00 am to catch the 7:00 am flight. We introduced ourselves to a haggard and tired looking Spassky at the gate before boarding.

Once we arrived at my home in Dallas, Spassky was delighted to learn there were tennis courts a couple of blocks away and that my wife, Susan, was a class A tennis player. Boris was trim and in great shape for a forty-nine year old. Susan played him several times and told me afterwards, “Boris is very good at tennis, too.”

3

The entire Dallas chess community had been abuzz about the Spassky visit for weeks prior to his arrival. Although it had been 14 years since the Fischer–Spassky match in 1972, Boris Spassky was still a household name in the U.S. I had no trouble filling the fifty slots for the simul, and I had several more on a waiting list.

Spassky was a debonair, worldly, and kind gentleman, without a hint of self-importance or arrogance. He was peaceful and relaxed, and seemed only to want to enjoy each day, moment by moment, with no stress. At a reception I hosted for Boris, he calmly answered all the Bobby Fischer questions everybody could throw at him. Boris later told me that he had been getting these same questions nonstop since the 1972 match. Later when I ran into Boris at the 1990 Kasparov-Karpov World Championship match in Lyons, France, he chuckled and told me he was STILL

answering the same old Bobby Fischer questions every day. Boris and Fischer remained friends after the 1972 match. The fact that Bobby chose Spassky as his 1992 rematch opponent was no accident.

When the night of the big simul came, I set up a table in the Marriott ballroom to verify the sign up list and collect $50 from each player. All fifty players showed up,

so Spassky kindly said he

3

Pictures from the Dallas Chess Club: After last month’s article on David Bronstein, Lou Hays’ friend Kay Hale sent these images from the Dallas in the 1990s. Clockwise from left: Bronstein lecturing at the club in 1993, Lou Hays with Bronstein 1993, Lou Hays as club president, 1990s; Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan lecturing at the club, 1995.

4

4

would play everybody on the waiting list the following night, which he did at the Dallas Chess Club. After all players had checked in and paid, I went outside and hid the $2,500 in a “secret” compartment beneath the console in my car.

Kay Hale, a Dallas chess player who was at the simul that night wrote in his excellent article about the exhibition in 1986, recently printed in Texas Knights, Vol. 58, No.3 — https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5FHoiUzDb1EaVc3LVREb1lNaFk/view

“Spassky gave an autobiographical sketch of himself prior to his simultaneous play. He began by talking about his abilities as a player. He said quite matter-of-factly that, when he was young, it was almost unbelievable how strong he was. He said that even today when he plays over some of his earlier games he is extremely impressed with the quality of them.

In Spassky's words, "My train has gone," meaning that he felt that his best days as a chess player were behind him. The reader needs to realize that Spassky tends to be rather self-critical. Before dismissing him to the scrap heap of old pawn pushers, it is worthwhile to note that (then) World Chess Champion Gary Kasparov had never beaten Spassky up until 1986, and had, in fact, lost two games to Spassky! A young man from Brooklyn once had a similar problem!

Spassky lecturing at the Dallas Chess Club, 1986 (Photo courtesy of Kay Hale,)

In talking about the influence his trainers had on him, he began by talking about his work with Zak, who was his earliest trainer. Commenting on his association with Tolush,

5

he said that he learned how to handle the initiative from Tolush. It was during that period one starts seeing the King's Gambit and Hennig-Schara Gambit appear in his games. Prior to his association with Tolush, he played "like an old man," meaning that he played solidly and positionally, but not at all sharply. From Bonderevsky, he learned to play "until only the Kings were left." (At one point in Spassky's career, he tended to offer numerous draws.)

… The question was directed to Spassky about what he would have written in a chapter in the book How to Open a Chess Game [a popular opening book in that era]. Spassky's eyes became quite animated at this question, and he replied, "The King's Gambit!" He very warmly talked about his extreme fondness for this opening and that he had played "thousands of King's Gambits," primarily in simultaneous exhibitions. Not only did he leave the impression that this was an effective weapon in simultaneous exhibitions, but that was an opening near and dear to his heart. Interestingly enough, in his simultaneous display in Dallas, he responded with the King's Gambit on all boards when his opponent responded to his 1.e4 with 1…e5.”

Despite Spassky’s supposed dull style early on, he played many sparkling and brilliant games:

Continued on page 22

5

Waiting for a Blunder

by John Cope

1

What is perhaps the worst bad habit that intermediate players have, one so natural and insidious that it often holds back players from improving their results? I call it “waiting for a blunder.” As a sports aficionado, I very much enjoy sports analogies; so let me enlist one to explain. When a football quarterback drops back to pass, he is hoping to find an open receiver. If one of the defending backs falls down, leaving a receiver wide open, it is easy to throw him the ball for a big gain or touchdown. In amateur or high school football this happens all the time, and seemingly all a good quarterback has to do is “wait for a defender to stumble” and hit the open man. But of course as that quarterback graduates to college or pro football, the defenders get better and better. Simply waiting for the defenders to blow their coverage no longer works, because it seldom happens, so a quarterback who keeps indulging in that strategy will find himself getting sacked a lot and ending up face down in the mud under 900 pounds of smelly defensive linemen.

A similar thing happens to novice chess players as they improve at chess. I saw it in my own games when I was a young player, and I see it in the games of my students. As a youngster gains skill with tactics, he or she can win a lot of games simply by taking advantage of

2

tactical stumbles by the opponent. Coaches teach tactics first for that reason. Winning against other novice players with tactics alone thus tends to lead to an artificial reliance upon tactics — like the quarterback who waits for the defender to stumble, we wait for the opponent to blunder. But “waiting for a blunder” is not a strategy, and a reliance upon it is a bad habit that ceases to work as you graduate to playing tougher opponents.

In this month’s article, first we’ll look at a typical example in which a tactically proficient player simply makes “natural” moves or “trappy” moves while hopefully waiting for that blunder. It will show why it is tempting, and why it is problematic. Lastly we will look at an example of a better way toward improvement — developing our ability to make purposeful moves that assertively stick with a plan. There’s an old chess saying that “a bad plan is better than no plan at all,” and there’s some truth to that. Even pursuing a second-rate plan gives our moves purpose during the game. It’s much easier to keep up a strong standard of play when playing purposefully.

Just being able to get through a game without dropping pieces is worth hundreds of rating points to novice players; most of my students have reached ratings of 1000+ after having learned basic tactics. To use another football analogy, a quarterback must first learn how to throw the ball accurately before it makes sense for him to try to learn the intricacies of reading a defense. But sooner or later that quarterback will have to learn that and all the other elements of his craft in order to go beyond the high school level. Similarly, tactics will get you as high as the 1500+ level or so in chess, but if you continue to rely on them, your rating will start to plateau. You will need to shed this bad habit and become more adept at planning to proceed further.

In our first example, Black is a very capable young player who has since reached A-class and is capable of beating experts. But here,

6

ALEX RELYEA Former Okie Alex Relyea was honored with the 2016 Organizer of the Year Award by USChess. See the article, page 9.

3

against a lower-rated adult player, he handicaps himself by wandering back and forth between several different provocative waiting ideas, seemingly trying to entice the opponent into a tactical scuffle. But his opponent doesn’t cooperate — White calmly goes about his business, avoiding any major tactical errors and following a simple plan. By the end, White’s purposeful moves carry the day. Duke, Brian (1570) – Jiang, Bryan (1670) 5th OCF Hanken FIDE Open (2.16.2014)

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 g6 3.c4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.e4 0-0 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Qd2 Re8(?!) 8.Be2 Ng4 9.Bg5 c5 White continues to sensibly develop, but Black’s moves have been odd given the normal plans in such positions. Here he seeks to start a fracas in the center. White can take advantage of this with 10. h3. But instead White just closes the center, as he has a plan in mind.

10.d5 a6 11. h3 Nge5 12. 0-0 f6? Provocative. Black’s knight sortie has only culminated with the piece on an insecure post. Black is playing 2-3 move ideas that don’t really go together while apparently hoping for some sort of tactical melee to be initiated by the opponent. He’s like the quarterback waiting in the pocket for one of the defenders to fall down so a receiver can break wide open. But his unwillingness to throw into tighter lanes, so to speak, is causing the defensive line to get a little too close for comfort.

13.Bh4 Nf7 14.a3! White has developed his pieces, sidestepped thematically bad trades, and identified a plan: queenside expansion. While playing on the kingside might be even stronger after Black’s self-inflicted weaknesses on that wing, White focuses on the plan he is more confident in and follows it up sensibly. 14...Bh6 15.Qc2 Kh8? Instead of justifying his previous move by

White to move and win. (Easy)

Black to move and win. (Difficult)

Answers Next Page

4

improving the bishop again with 15 … Bf4!, Black marks time. While one or two of the above moves seemed similar—waiting moves whose real purpose was to delay for the opponent to make a mistake—at least most of them connected to some sort of short-term plan. This, on the other hand, is pretty much just more waiting. Perhaps the most discouraging part of playing in this way, though, is that the opponent only has to play sensibly to make the waiting itself a self-destructive plan. 16.b4 b6 17.Rfb1 Rg8 This is either another waiting move or, more likely, played with the idea of pushing the g-pawn at some point. But this seems like a vastly inferior version of Black’s normal plans to expand on the kingside in the late opening in the KID. It’s much later, not as well supported, further away from the center, and less effective even if it succeeds. Not a good cocktail. 18.Bg3! Nfe5 19.a4

5

19… Bg7?

This type of harmony often leads to wins even when there might have been better options. White might not be throwing touchdowns, but he is driving down

8

(1) This typical attacking position is begging for an attack down the a-file, but how? The solution shows the power of the double check: 1. Ra8+! (just to get the rook out of the way with tempo to bring over the queen) 1. ..Kxa8 2. Qa1+ Kb8 (Now what?) 3. Qa7+!! (Only on this square!) 3…Kxa7 4. Nc6+

(2) You may have noticed white’s weaknesses on g2 and h2, plus Black’s latent threat of …Qf1mate if white ever leaves protection of that square. But how to take advantage of all that with so few pieces left? The solution: 1…Rd2! (This indirectly targets h2, as black now threatens 2…Bf3+ and mate on g2 or h2 next move.) 2. Rxd2, Bf3+ 3. Bxf3, Qf1 mate.

Visit www.ocfchess.org

Voted BEST GENERAL CHESS WEBSITE

Chess Journalists of America (2016) Actively Managed by Jim Hollingsworth

Ou r I nt r ep id Te x ic a n V ol u n tee r

Get OCF Member Content like the OCM

Plus ü Breaking News ü Archived Chess Information ü Useful Chess Links

… and more

6

the field and gaining five yards every play.

20.a5 bxa5 21.bxa5 Qc7 Black places his queen here because he wants to slow White down on the b-file — pressure on this a5-pawn prevents White from immediately invading with Na4-b6. Still, the queen here doesn’t meld with Black’s gestures on the kingside, and without her involved it isn’t likely any future attack there will succeed.

22.Nxe5! The start of a simple but effective plan so White can dominate the b-file, particularly the b6 square, and accomplish a strong infiltration into black’s position along the file. Again, this isn’t objectively the strongest move according to the computer, which prefers 22. Ne1, but White plays this with a clear purpose: He is going to get his bishop to e1 where it protects the a5-pawn, then play Na4 and infiltrate the b-file.

22...fxe5 23.f3 Bh6 While White’s move was part of a good plan, it did have a drawback: weakening the dark squares on the kingside, particularly e3. Black takes aim at what was left behind. 24.Be1 Nf6? Black again balks on a sensible plan that would both synergize with his last move and limit his

Continued on page 24

9

1

Alex Relyea has been honored by USChess with the 2016 Organizer of the Year Award for his outstanding work as a

TD and tournament organizer. Alex lived in Oklahoma for six years while at OU and is remembered for his many tournaments there, and the hole in the OKC scene it left when he departed for New Hampshire in 2008. In New England he has even increased his tournament work. For example, his 2016 Events Include

• Portsmouth Open • Bangor Open • New Hampshire Closed Championship • Manchester GM Norm Invitational

2016 U.S. Girls Junior • 76th New England Open • Vermont Open • IM Danny Kopec Memorial • … and many smaller tournaments.

USChess Executive Board Member Mike Atkins explains the award by saying, “When this came up in the board meeting, I introduced Alex’s name. I knew most of them either knew Alex or knew who he was. I had seen a number of the other board members watching Alex’s women’s norm tournament online at a recent meeting and providing an underserved population with norm chances

2

was enough by itself to warrant the award. I pointed out other events he had organized and it was a slam dunk.” Alex was born and raised in Bangor, Maine, began chess in 1987 (high school) and went to graduate school at OU from 2002 to 2008, which is also when he began organizing and directing under the mentorship of OCF. He has been married 21 years to Nita Patel and they live now in Bedford, NH. See this in-depth interview with him linked here on chessmaine.net. A solid class A player, Alex also has about 75 ICCF correspondence games going now and a 2250 rating in CC. He also holds many chess offices and sits on several US Chess committees. With this and the tournament organizing he is remarkably busy with chess, and yet he manages it all despite some serious health issues related to diabetes. Congratulations Alex! It is nice to see such a worthy player/organizer get recognition.

The OU Chess Team participated last month in New Orleans at the Pan American Intercollegiate Team

Tournament for the first time in many years and performed remarkably well.

The Chess Club at OU does not enjoy official sport status with the University of Oklahoma, yet, and has achieved all their success so far by their own efforts. The new club President is Matt Dalthorp.

The OU-A team finished tied for 17th despite being much lower rated than that at the start. The team was: Daniel Ng (2.5) (2291), Matt Dalthorp (4.0) (2024), Kyle Twitchell (2.5) (1828), Florian Helff (3.0) (1733).

OU-B finished tied for 43rd place out of the 60 teams, with members Jeremiah Buenger (3.0) (1680), Kenneth Teel (1.5) (1636), Chris Brown (2.0) (1519), Jacob Farber (3.0) (1382)

More next issue.

10

3

Zelnick and Long Win in Joplin The Southwest Missouri Diehards Open, a memorial to a chess club in existence in Joplin for some 50 years, was held January 14th and ended in a four-way tie among Okie experts David Zelnick and James Long, plus Missourians Daniel Todd and Chris Talbot (all with 3). The event was directed by Martin Stahl, and the prize fund sponsored by Gary White of Kansas City, one of the founders of this club. James Long reports:

“It was a low turnout (due to ice concerns) but the prize fund was guaranteed, … with $125 awarded to each. Daniel Todd, rated 1697, drew with both Zelnick and me. He was one tough cookie indeed. In the final position from my game, he had a mate in 5 but offered a draw in time pressure that I gladly accepted. I think he had David beat as well, but also offered a draw.

The site was exceptional at the Hilton Garden Inn, and Martin will be hosting another one-day tournament on March 4th at the same place. I would encourage anyone in the Tulsa area to consider attending as it is a really nice place and has great food right around the corner.”

“There was a “Diehards” tournament crosstable from 1968 where Tom Amburn (rated 1858 at the time) tied for first. Jim Berry and George Hulburd also were names that I knew from OK. … Some nostalgia from the days of chess past.”

We hope to have an article about the history of this Joplin club in a future issue.

4

3rd Norman Chess Festival Jan 28-29, 2017 TD: Matt Dalthorp

The Chess Club at OU’s third two-day 5-SS chess event in Norman was won by Senior Master Advait Patel ($225), with 5-0 in a field that included 3 masters and two experts. Howard Zhong was 2nd at 4-1. Other prizewinners included Shaun Graham-Bowcaster and Joe Veal. The Reserve Section (U1700) was won by Alex Bohn ($150) with 4.5. Zile Cao and Francis Irenge tied for 2nd with 3.5, and Oscar Wang was top U1400.

Matt Dalthorp was TD and Kyle Twitchell was assistant TD. Crosstables are online. More coverage next issue.

Daniel Todd (left) vs. James Long at the SWMO Diehards Open

Below: The top boards in round 2. Pictured in each matchup starting in front is L.Zachare – A.Patel, D. Ng – J. Veal, J. Ellis – H. Zhong, C. Ilonze – S. Case. Photo by Cheng Zhong.

11

HOWARD ZHONG 2nd Place in 10th GRADE NATIONALS  In  December,  Norman  teenager  Howard  Zhong  won  2nd  place  in  the  10th  grade  section  of  the  U.S.  K-­‐12  National  Scholastic  tournament  in  Nashville,  TN.  He  was  actually  in  the  lead  going  into  the  last  round  but  lost  to  Alburt  Lu  (2393)  from  CA.  According  to  his  IM  coach,  "He  had  advantage  in  the  middlegame  and  later  around  move  40  he  was  a  little  worse  but  could  have  forced  a  draw."  Still  it  is  an  impressive  result  with  more  surely  to  come  from  Oklahoma’s  first  ‘homegrown’  NM  in  25  years.    According  to  Howard’s  father  Cheng  Zhong,  the  trip  to  Nashville  was  not  finalized  until  very  late  due  to  both  the  threat  of  bad  weather  during  the  11-­‐hour  drive  (which  turned  out  okay),  and  his  school  final  exams  (they  had  to  make  special  arrangements  in  the  school  to  skip  them).      “His  teachers  were  very  supportive  to  accommodate  our  request,”  Cheng  said.    Support  from  the  Norman  chess  community  also  helped.  “We  would  like  to  thank  OU  Chess  Club  for  providing  Howard  with  opportunities  of  practice  and  tournaments,”  Cheng  said.  “In  particular,  OU  freshman,  NM  Daniel  Ng  played  numerous  training  games  with  Howard,  which  was  very  instrumental  to  Howard's  good  performance  in  nationals.”    Howard Zhong (2219) — Albert Lu (2393) 2016 K-12 National Championship [D35][Rd 7] 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bf4 Nf6 6. e3 O-O 7. Bd3 c5 8.dxc5 Bxc5 9. Nf3 Nc6 10. O-O d4 11. Na4 Bd6 12. Bxd6 Qxd6 13. Nxd4 Nxd4 14.exd4 Ng4 15. g3 Rd8 16. Be4 Nf6 17. Bg2 Bg4 18. Qd2 Rab8 19. f3 Be6 20. Rfd1Rbc8 21. Nc3 Rc4 22. b3 Rc6 23. Rac1 Qb4 24. Ne2 Qa3 25. Rxc6 bxc6 26. Nc3 Nd5 27. Nxd5 Bxd5 28. f4 g6 29. Bxd5 Rxd5 30. Qc2 Qd6 31. Rc1 Rxd4 32. Qe2 Rd5 33.Re1 Qb4 34. Rd1 Rxd1+ 35. Qxd1 h5 36. h4 Qc3 37. Kf2 Kg7 38. a4 a5 39. Qf3 c2+ 40. Kf1 Kf6 41. Qe3 Kf5 42. Qf3 Qe4 43. Qc3 Kg4 44. Qxa5 Qf3+ 45. Ke1 Qxg3+ 46.Ke2 Qf3+ 47. Ke1 Qe3+ 48. Kd1 Qxb3+ 49. Kc1 Qe3+ 50. Kd1 Qxf4 51. Qg5+ Qxg5 52.hxg5 h4 53. Ke2 Kg3 54. a5 h3 55. a6 h2 56. a7 h1=Q 57. a8=Q Qf3+ 58. Ke1 c5 59. Qb8+ Kg4 60. Qe5 Qg3+ 0-1

Jim Hollingsworth Web Design Fluid Web Design

Looks Great on Desktops, Tablets, and Phones

http://jimhollingsworth.us

Right: Howard receiving the giant trophy from TD Franc Guadalupe. Below: the opponent takes a very last minute look at Howard’s games online while Howard looks on, bemused.

12

The Holiday Open was held December 31 in Stillwater, drawing a strong field including NM Mark Hulsey and several experts. The annual event sponsored by Jim Berry as usual was hard fought and fun, and ended in a tie for first between Joe Dean Veal and James Long atop 29 competitors. “Twenty-six years ago they told me no one would come to a tournament held between Christmas and New Years,” Jim said, followed by gesturing around the room to show the good turnout has proved them wrong over the years. There were a number of upsets: Ciaran O’Hare – no doubt not used to these fast time controls — was held to a draw by youngster Luke Tran of Kansas, Hulsey was held to a draw by Charles Woodall in round 2, and Jim Berry had a notable upset win against Chuck Johnson, who overstepped in a winning but complicated position. We welcomed two new USCF members, Omar Abouzahr of Stillwater, and Wenbao Wang, father of Eric Wang (I believe), both of whom played quite well.

The 27th Holiday Open will be in Tulsa. Games in a future issue.

26th Annual Holiday Open: Veal and Long Top a Strong Field

Right: Veal vs Long in the last round, with Krish Kumar and Logan Zachare behind, who tied for 3rd with Jason Wawrzaszek. Below: Charles Woodall (left) vs. Mark Hulsey, with Jim Berry in the background.

13

12

14

34

“Correspondence chess is a different game than Over-The-Board chess that happens to use the same rules.”

15

1

This  month  an  experiment  …  we  are  presenting  the  same  GOTM  from  last  month,  but  this  time  with  Ciaran’s  own  notes  from  an  “insider’s”  perspective,  explaining  how  the  techniques  of  using  the  computer  in  correspondence  play  produce  subtle  effects  that  lead  to  incredible  games.    I  will  include  some  of  my  notes  from  last  month  here  in  blue  so  that  you  can  see  some  examples  of  different  points  of  view  on  the  game.  —  TB  

Caraphina  (CPV),  Francisco  (2349)  –    O'Hare  SIM  (USA),  Ciaran  (2434)    31.03.2016  [D46]  [NOTES  BY  CIARAN  O’HARE]  I  had  to  win  at  least  one  game  as  Black,  and  this  was  the  opponent  I  had  targeted  as  most  likely  due  to  his  previous  games.  I  discovered  a  true  opening  novelty  in  a  position  played  by  Grandmasters  many  times  before.    1.d4  d5  2.c4  e6  3.Nf3  Nf6  4.Nc3  c6  5.e3  Nbd7  6.Qc2  Bd6  7.Bd3  0-­‐0  8.0-­‐0  dxc4  9.Bxc4  b5  10.Be2  Bb7  11.Rd1  Qc7  12.e4  e5  Up  to  here  White  had  been  largely  determining  the  opening  moves.  Here  he  chose  which  path  he  wanted  to  follow  and  after  13.g3  I  began  my  first  serious  look  at  the  position  and  opening  theory.  13.g3  13.Bg5  is  more  common  13...Rfe8  14.dxe5  Nxe5  15.Bg5  Shirov  and  others  have  reached  this  position.  15...Neg4!?    This  was  my  first  chance  to  determine  the  path.  I  looked  at  the  most  aggressive  line  first,  and  it  was  here  that  I  discovered  my  improvement.  After  a  quick  check  of  the  quieter  lines  I  was  confident  that  there  was  a  decent  chance  that  White  would  walk  into  my  improvement.  The  problem  with  sharp  positions  is  that  if  both  players  navigate  the  tricky  moves  (usually  well  known  to  theory  and  engines),  the  tension  usually  dissipates  quickly  through  exchanges.  Most  games  are  won  by  positional  means  leading  to  a  significant  tactic.  [15...b4!?  was  the  main  alternative  16.Nxe5!  Rxe5  17.Bxf6  gxf6  18.Nb1  Bf8!?N  19.Nd2  Rae8  20.Bf1˜;  

2

15...Nxf3+  16.Bxf3  Qe7  17.Ne2  Be5  feels  better  for  white  because  of  the  Pc6;  15...Rad8?!  16.Nh4]    16.h3    TB had commented here “This seems to be a new move, a provocative attempt to win that my Fritz computer also says is best. But considering how Ciaran crushes it, perhaps it is not wise! GMs in OTB games have here played 16.Bxf6 …” Ciaran  says:      White  follows  known  theory,  perhaps  steering  for  an  early  draw.  [16.Rac1  Bc5  17.Bxf6  Bxf2+  18.Kh1  gxf6  19.Nxb5!  Qe7  20.Nd6  Ne3  21.Qb3  Nxd1  22.Rxd1=  Rad8  23.Nxe8  Rxe8  is  an  example  of  exchanges  killing  the  position]  16...Bxg3!  17.hxg4  Nxg4  18.Be3    

 18...Re6!    

—But  Ciaran  has  a  very  different  viewpoint:  Ciaran:    18...Nxe3  was  exclusively  played  by  humans  before.  By  destroying  the  King's  protection  Black  often  sets  up  a  perpetual.  19.fxe3  Re6  (19...b4?≤  20.Na4  Re6  21.Nc5  Rg6  22.Rd7  Bh4+)  20.Bd3  Rf6  21.Rf1  Rh6  22.Ne2≤;  18...Bh2+  19.Kh1  (19.Kg2!?N  I  thought  this  would  be  an  improvement  for  White.  19...b4  20.Rh1!)  19...Re6  20.Ng5N  Bg1  21.e5  Rh6+  22.Kxg1  Nxe3  23.Qd3  Nxd1  24.Rxd1≤;  18...b4?]  

So,  you  can  see  from  Ciaran’s  comment  that  not  only  was  his  database  more  extensive  than  mine,  but  he  had  been  searching  diligently  in  this  line  to  find  improvements  for  Black.  He  finds  it…    19.Bd4      19.Qd3  Rae8  (19...Nxe3=  20.Qxe3  Bf4  21.Qd4  Rd6  

16

3

22.Qc5  Rh6  23.Rd3  Bd6  24.Rxd6  Qxd6  25.Qxd6  Rxd6  26.e5  Rg6+)  20.Qd7  Qb8  21.Bc5  Nf6!?  22.Qd3  b4  23.Ng5  19...Rh6!!  N    This  was  my  novelty.  I  felt  that  Black  was  one  piece  away  from  winning  against  the  White  King.  White  was  so  underdeveloped  that  he  could  not  use  the  two  tempi  I  was  spending  on  the  Rook  lift.  [19...Rg6  Seems  to  have  been  worked  out  to  a  draw!  20.Kf1!  c5!?  21.Be3!?  (21.Nxb5!?  Qf4  22.Bxc5  Bxe4  23.Qd2  Qf6  24.Qd4  Bxf3  25.Qxf6  Nh2+  26.Kg1  (26.Ke1?!  Rxf6  27.fxg3  Re8  28.Nc3  Bxe2  29.Nxe2  Rfe6  30.Kd2  Rxe2+  31.Kc3≥  Draw  (45)  MAKAROV-­‐1978  (2529)-­‐Black  Queen  (2509)  Engine  Room  2014)  26...Rxf6  27.fxg3  Bxe2ô  28.Rd6  Ng4  29.Rxf6  Nxf6  30.Nxa7  Ne4  31.Be3≥  0-­‐1  (38)  Wrong  move(2536)-­‐Black  Queen  (2546)  Engine  Room  2014)  21...Nxe3+  22.fxe3  from  here  12  engine  games  were  drawn.;  19...Rae8=  20.Bd3  Bh2+  21.Kg2  Rh6  22.Ne2!  seems  a  troublesome  defensive  move.  22...Qc8  23.Kf1  Bd6  24.Rac1  20.b4      [20.Nxb5?  Bh2+  21.Kf1  cxb5]    20...Re8!!  This  was  the  hard  move  to  find.  The  point  is  that  any  opening  of  the  e-­‐file  leaves  White's  King  unable  to  run  and  hide.  [20...Nxf2?  21.Bxf2;  20...Qf4?  21.Qd2;  20...a5  21.bxa5  c5  22.Nd5  Bxd5  23.exd5  Bd6  24.Bd3  Nh2  and  even  here  Black  has  good  compensation.]    21.Bxa7  ?!  [21.Nxb5?  Qf4  22.Nc3  Nxf2!;    I  was  expecting  21.a4  Bf4!  (21...a5!?;  21...Ree6  22.e5  Bxe5  23.Bxe5  Nxe5  24.Nxe5  Rxe5  25.Bf3≥)  22.axb5  Qc8!  23.Bf1  Nh2  24.Bg2  Nxf3+  25.Bxf3  Qh3  26.Bg2  Rg6  27.f3;  21.Rab1?!  Ree6  22.e5  Bxe5  23.Bxe5  Nxe5  24.Ne4  f5!]    21...Bf4      

 The  rest  of  the  game  was  fun  to  spend  analyzing.  Engine  evaluations  just  kept  getting  better  for  Black.  From  a  correspondence  perspective  the  game  was  over.  I  just  had  to  make  sure  that  I  

4

didn’t  allow  him  a  passed  a-­‐  or  b-­‐  pawn.  22.Bc5  [22.Qd3  Bc8  23.Bd4  Nh2  24.Nxh2  Bxh2+  25.Kf1  Rh3  26.Be3  Bf4  27.Ke1  Bxe3  28.fxe3  Qe7  29.Qd4  Qh4+]    22...Bc8  23.Bd4  Qe7  24.Kf1  Qe6  25.Ke1  Rh1+  26.Bf1  Black  can  pick  up  a  few  loose  pawns  before  going  for  the  kill.  White  is  paralyzed.    26...Qc4  27.Qe2  Qxb4  28.a4  Nf6  29.Rab1    [29.Bxf6  gxf6  30.Rd3  Bh3  31.Ng1  Rxg1  32.Rxh3  f5!  [always  a  threat  with  the  Re8]  33.Rb1  Qa5  34.Qd3  bxa4  35.Ke2  fxe4  36.Nxe4  Qf5  37.f3  Rxf1  38.Rxf1  Qxh3]          29...Qa5    

 The  Queen’s  journey  from  e7  to  the  q-­‐side  and  back  to  g5  and  h4  is  pretty.    30.Nd2  [30.Bxf6  gxf6  31.Rd3  b4  32.Nd1  Ba6]  30...b4  31.Nc4  Qg5  32.Rxb4  Bh3  33.Ne3  Ng4  34.Qf3  [34.Kd2  Rh2  35.Bxh3  Nxf2  36.Bd7  Nxd1  37.Qxh2  Bxh2  38.Bxe8  Nxe3  39.Bxf7+  Kxf7  40.Bxe3  Qe7  41.Rc4  Be5  42.Nd1  Qa3  43.Rxc6  Qxa4  44.Rc5  Qxe4]  34...Nxf2  35.Kxf2  Rh2+  36.Bg2  Qh4+  37.Kg1  Bxg2  38.Qxg2  Rxg2+  39.Nxg2  Bh2+  40.Kf1  Qh3  41.Ne2  Qf3+  42.Bf2    

 42…  Bg3!  One  last  trick  43.Nxg3  Qxd1+  44.Ne1  h5  45.Nf5  Qd2  46.Rd4  Qf4  47.Ng3  c5  48.Rd3  h4  49.Rf3  Qe5  50.Nf5  Qh2  51.Nxh4  Qh1+  52.Ke2  Rxe4+  53.Re3  Rxa4  [Not  53...Rxh4??  With  the  K  exposed.  Black  wants  to  leave  pieces  on.  54.Bxh4  Qxh4]  54.Nhf3  Ra2+  55.Nd2  Qb7  56.Rd3  Qb4  57.Nef3  c4  58.Rd8+  Kh7  59.Be3  c3  White  resigns.  A  fun  game…  for  Black!      0-­‐1

17

Feb 11 2017 4th “Do or Do Not” Quads Norman OK 3-RR Quads; G/60 + 30. OU Student Union. More Info: http://oklahoma.orgsync.com/org/chess/home Feb 16-20 2017 Southwest Class Championships Fort Worth TX 9SS (Master Section), 7SS (other sections). $30,000 total prize fund. DFW Airport Marriott South, 4151 Centreport Blvd., Fort Worth, TX. More info: http://www.uschess.org/tlas/upcoming.php?STATE=TX Mar 1 2017 Pioneer Chess League Season Begins OK Pre-season team signups begin January 1. See Article last issue. More info on the OCF website. Mar 18-19 2017 Arkansas Open Fayetteville AR 5-SS; G/90 + 30, Mount Sequoyah Retreat Center, 150 N. Skyline Dr., Fayetteville AR. Two Sections: ($$ b/40) Open: $250-150; U1800-$120; Reserve: (U-1600) $150-100; U-1300-$100; Upset-$50; EF: Open $45; Reserve $35 (deduct $5 from either if postmarked by Mar. 13). TD: Les Kline, 801 N. Rush Dr., Fayetteville AR 72701; cl_kline@sbcglobal.net; (479) 595-5720. Reg. 8:15-9:15 AM Sat.; Rds. 9:30-2-6:30; Sun. 9-1:15. ACA/OSA; USCF required. Lodging: Cabin rooms $80 (no tax) at Mt. Sequoyah Retreat Center; 800-760-8126 (toll free), M-F 9am-5pm. Mar 25 2017 5th “Do or Do Not” Quads Norman OK 3-RR Quads; G/60 + 30. OU Student Union. More Info: http://oklahoma.orgsync.com/org/chess/home Apr 22 2017 6th “Do or Do Not” Quads Norman OK 3-RR Quads; G/60 + 30. OU Student Union. More Info: http://oklahoma.orgsync.com/org/chess/home Apr 29 2017 15th Annual Red River Shootout Davis OK

This is the REAL Red River Shootout, the annual team match between the most fanatical chess players in Oklahoma and Texas. 2 games with same opponent. More details at http://rrsochess.net/rrso_home.html#RRSO including the history of the

event, team captains, and more. May 27-28 2017 Frank K Berry Memorial Tulsa OK

5-SS; G/90+30; Trade Winds Central Hotel, 3141 E. Skelly Dr (NW corner of 51st and Harvard), Tulsa OK 74105 (918-749-5561). Free WiFi, www.tradewindstulsa.com Hotel Rates: $55-$69. Two Sections: Open, and Reserve (U1700). EF: $40 if mailed by 5/21, $50

thereafter, FREE entry for Masters 2200+ (deducted from prizewinnings). Free OCF Memb. Prizes $$2400 (1st prize Gtd., the rest b/65). Open: $600(G)-250 U2100: 200-100, U1900: 200-100, Reserve (U1700): $300-200, U1400: 200-100, U1100/UNR: 150. More $$ if entries permit. Byes: One half-point bye Rds 1-5 if commit before Sat 9PM. REG: 9-9:45 Sat AM Rounds: 10-2:30-7, 9-1:15. Possible bughouse tournament. Entries to: Tom Braunlich, 7500 S. Birch, Broken Arrow OK 74011. Inquiries: tom.braunlich@cox.net Web: www.ocfchess.org

For More Tournament Info Visit the USCF Tournament Site:

www.uschess.org/tlas/upcoming.php

18

1

 Comparing  Notes  ...    LeBled  IM  (FRA),Pierre  (2414)  –    O'Hare  SIM  Game  (USA),Ciaran  (2434)  [B94]  FOR  OCM,  31.03.2015  [O’Hare]  M.  Pierre  Le  Page  is  a  French  IM  who  only  rarely  does  not  draw  games.  Looking  over  his  previous  games  he  takes  few  chances  and  follows  mainline  openings.   I   had   felt   that   I   should   just   draw   this  game  and  move  on.    1.e4   c5   2.Nf3   d6   3.d4   cxd4   4.Nxd4   Nf6   5.Nc3  a6  6.Bg5  Nbd7  7.Bc4  Qb6  8.Bb3  e6  9.Qd2  Be7  10.0-­‐0-­‐0  Nc5  11.f3  Qc7  [11...0ñ0  is  a  tempo  loss  that   Black   cannot   afford   12.h4!   Better   than   the  standard  Kb1  12...Qc7  13.h5!]  12.g4!?  b5!  13.h4  Bd7  14.Kb1  0-­‐0!?      [14...Rb8?  15.Nf5!   I  do  not  need  to  allow   this!  

15...exf5   16.Bxf6   Bxf6   17.Nd5   Qd8   18.exf5   0-­‐0  19.g5  Be5  20.f4  and  White  wins;    14...b4!   After   the   game   I   thought   this  may   be  

the  only  move   that   saves  the  variation   for  Black,  by   driving   away   a   possible   attacker   and   leaving  the  King   in   the   center   -­‐   very   scary!  15.Nce2  a5˜]  15.a3!  

   It  was  here  that  I  confirmed  my  suspicion  that  

he  was  following  a  previous  game  of  his  where  he  was   playing   Black.   I   went   looking   for   where   he  thought  he  had  found  an  improvement  for  White.  It  was  playing  19.  cxb3  (see  below)  which  saves  a  tempo  for  the  attack  by  not  bringing  the  N  back  to  capture.   However   I   worked   out   that   this  weakening  of  the  White  King's  protection  allowed  Black   enough   counterplay.   All   was   well   and   I  could  continue  following  his  game.    15...Rfb8   16.Bxf6   Bxf6   17.g5   Be7   18.h5   Nxb3  [18...a5   (too   soon)   19.Nf5!?   Bf8   (19...exf5?  20.Bxf7+!   Kxf7   21.g6+   Kg8   22.Nd5)   20.g6   Nxb3  21.cxb3  h6  22.gxf7+  Kxf7  23.Nxd6+]          19.cxb3    

 

2

He  plays  his  new  move,  as  expected.    [19.Nxb3  was  what  his  previous  opponent  had  played   and   I   had   worked   out   replies   to   any  other  places  White  might  try  and  improve.  ]  19...Be8??    I  was  on  a  break  and  so  did  not  respond  to  his  move   for   two  weeks.   Upon   return   I  made   the  unforgivable   error   of   not   referring   to   my  written  notes  and  thoughts,  but  had   set  up  an  analysis   board   incorrectly.   As   I   pressed   the  send   button   my   third   eye   saw   that   I   was  responding   to   19.   Nxb3   and   not   19.   cxb3.  [Correct   was   19...a5   (only   move)   20.Nf5!?  (20.g6  b4)  20...Bf8!   (20...exf5?  21.h6!)  

21.g6   Bc6   (21...Be8??   22.gxh7+   Kh8   23.Nd5!!)  22.Nxd6   Bxd6   23.Qxd6   Qxd6   24.Rxd6   Be8  White   is   better   but   Black   should   hold.   On   the  other  hand  if  this  is  the  best  that  Black  can  do  then   14....0-­‐0   is   a   mistake   and   Black   should  play  14....  b4]    20.Nf5!    -­‐-­‐  BLACK  IS  TOTALLY  LOST!  -­‐-­‐      I   fell   into   a   deep   misery   as   by   this   time   the  other  games  were  progressing  favorably,  and  a  loss  would   have   put   the   kibosh   on   the  whole  tournament.   I   set   the   game   aside   for   10   days,  and   then   spent  many  hours   trying   to   find  any  possible   escape.   I   came   up   with   the   6th   rank  defense  and  found  one  path  that  might  get  me  there   if   he   went   onto   autopilot   assuming   the  game  was  won.   Predicting   the   next   15  moves  was   straightforward   as   they   were   best   play  moves.    20...exf5     21.h6   f6   [21...g6   22.Nd5   Qd7  (22...Qa7?   23.Qc3   f6   24.gxf6   Bf8   25.Ne7+)  23.Qc3   f6   24.gxf6   Bd8   25.Ne7+   Kf8   26.exf5]  22.Nd5   Qd7   [22...Qd8?   23.g6!   Bxg6   24.Nf4!  and   mate   along   the   h-­‐file   24...Bf7   (24...d5  25.Nxg6  hxg6  26.hxg7)  25.hxg7]  23.hxg7   fxg5  24.Rxh7  Kxh7  25.Rh1+  Bh5  26.Rxh5+  Kxg7  

“As I pressed the send button my third eye saw that I was responding to 19. Nxb3 and not 19. cxb3!”

19

3

27.Nxe7  Qxe7  28.Rxg5+  Kf8  [28...Kf7  29.Qd5+  Qe6   30.Rg7+   Kxg7   31.Qxe6   fxe4]   29.Rxf5+  [29.Qf4  Qxg5  30.Qxg5  fxe4  31.Qf6+  Kg8  32.Qg6+  Kh8  33.Qxe4]  29...Ke8  30.Qd5  Rc8  31.e5    I  sent  the  next  moves  as  conditional  moves  (the  server   doesn’t   show   them   until   he   plays   his  move)   I   was   hoping   he   would   not   sense   that  there   was   a   swindle   being   planned)   31...Ra7  32.exd6   Qg7   33.Rg5   [33.Qe6+   Kd8   34.f4   Rc6  35.Rg5  Qh7+  36.Ka2  Rf7  37.Re5  Qg8  38.Qd5  Kd7  39.f5  Rg7  40.Re7+  Rxe7  41.Qxg8  Rxd6  is  similar  to   the  game]  33...Qh7+   34.Ka2  Kd8   [34...Kd7?  35.Re5   Kd8   36.Qe6   Qf7   37.Qh6   Kd7   38.Re7+  Qxe7  39.dxe7  Raa8]    

 35.Rg8+?  White  pays  the  price  for  not  checking  everything!   He   should   have   transposed   to   a  winning  Rook   ending   -­‐   but  while   Stockfish  will  eventually   find   it,   Komodo   sticks   with  winning  my  Queen   [Correct  was  35.Qg8+!   he  misses   his  chance   35...Qxg8   36.Rxg8+   Kd7   37.Rg7+   Kxd6  38.Rxa7  Rc6  39.a4  Kc5  40.Rf7  Rd6  41.Rf5+  Kb6  42.Ka3  Rd3  43.axb5  axb5  44.Kb4  Rd4+  45.Kc3]  35...Kd7   36.Rg1   Rc6   37.Qe5   Ra8   38.Rg7+  Qxg7  39.Qxg7+  Kxd6  40.f4  Rac8!   I  must  stop  the   P   getting   to   f6   [40...Rd8  Would   not   allow   a  3rd   rank   fortress!   41.f5   Rd7   42.Qf8+   Ke5  43.Qe8+   Kd6   44.f6   Rcc7   45.a4   Rf7   46.a5   Rb7  47.b4+ñ   [#]]  41.a4   [41.f5  R8c7  42.Qg5   (42.Qh8  Ke7!;  42.Qd4+  Ke7  43.a4  bxa4  44.bxa4  Kf7  45.Ka3  Rf6  46.Qd5+  Kg7  47.b4  Rcc6)  42...Kd7  43.f6  Ke6;  41.b4   Ke6!   42.Qe5+   Kf7   43.Kb3]   41...bxa4  42.bxa4  Ke6  43.b4   [43.Qh6+  Ke7  44.Qg5+  Kf7  (44...Rf6??   45.Qg7+)   ]   43...Rd8   44.Qg6+   [44.b5  axb5   45.axb5   Rcd6   46.Qe5+   Kf7   47.f5   R8d7  48.Ka3  Rb6  49.Ka4  Rdb7]  44...Kd7  45.Qf7+  Kc8  Now  my   fortress   cannot   be   stopped   or   broken  46.Qf5+  Kc7  47.Kb3  Rdd6  This  is  drawn  -­‐  park  a   rook   on   h6   and   the   other   floats   between   b6  and  f6  -­‐  or  park  one  on  d6  and  the  other  moves  

4

from  h6  to  f6  48.b5  axb5  49.axb5  Rb6  50.Kb4  Rh6  Draw  offered  and  accepted.  Strange  game  -­‐  When   I   knew   I  was   following   one   of   his   I   got  lazy   and   didn't   determine   that   I   should   not  castle  into  the  attack  (14...0-­‐0?!)  .  I  then  made  it  

     DRAW    O'Hare  SIM  (USA),  Ciaran  (2434)  –    Har-­‐Even  GM  (ISR),  Abir  (2408)    For  OCM,  31.03.2015    [A81]  [O’Hare]  Abir  Har-­‐Even  is  a  long  time  Israeli  GM.  He  has  a  penchant  for  the  Dutch,  which  I  feel  is  a  risky  opening,   so   I   encouraged   him   play   it!   1.d4   f5  2.g3  Nf6  3.Nf3  g6  4.Bg2  Bg7  5.0-­‐0  0-­‐0  6.b4!?  If   Black   doesn't   react   then   White   will   grab  space   on   the   Q-­‐side   and   have   an   endgame  advantage.  It  does  leave  c3  weak.  6...Nc6!?  7.c3  [7.a3   d5   8.Bb2   Ne4   Anand-­‐Nakamura   2010  Draw]  7...Ne4  8.a4  d5  9.Bf4  e6  10.Qc1  Qe7    It   was   time   to   take   stock   of   a   complicated  position.  It  is  dynamically  equal.  White  can  stop  Black  breaking  with  e5,  but  has   to  watch   for  a  K-­‐side   pawn  push.  White  will   eventually   swap  the  e4  N  and   hope   to   create   something   on   the  Q-­‐side.   11.Rd1   aimed   against   e5   by   Black  11...b6?!   This   computer   move   cannot   be  correct.   12.a5   Ba6?   I   just   considered   this   an  error,   if   not   close   to   a   lost   position.   [12...bxa5  13.b5!;   12...Bb7   13.a6!;   12...a6   13.Ne5   Bb7  14.h4!?]  13.axb6!   axb6   [13...Bxe2!?  may   have  been  the  original   intention  but...  14.bxc7!  Bxd1  15.Qxd1   g5   16.Nxg5!   Nxg5   17.Ra6!!   [#]  17...Nxb4   (17...Ne5   18.Bxg5   Qxg5   19.dxe5)  18.cxb4  Rfc8  19.Nc3]  14.Rxa6  Rxa6  [14...Nxd4  15.Nxd4  Rxa6  16.Nc6  Qd7  17.Bxe4  fxe4  18.c4!]  15.b5  Ra2  16.bxc6  Rxe2    

 17.c4!!   A  move   not   considered   by   the   engine  

20

5

which   favored   defending   by   Rf1   [17.Rf1   Ra2  18.h4   Rfa8   and   Black   has   compensation]  17...Qb4      [17...Rxf2?  18.Nc3!;    

18.Qa3!  White  forces  Black  to  simplify  down  to  an  ending  that  can  appear  equal,  but  should  be  a  technical  win  for  White  18...Qb2  19.Qxb2  Rxb2  20.Nbd2  White  has  to  activate  his  bishops  while  keeping   enough   pawns   on   the   board   to   win  20...h6   [20...Rc2   21.Bf1   h6   22.h4   Nc3   23.Bd3  Rb2   24.Re1   Ne4   25.Re2   Rb4]  21.h4   so   that   g5  would  allow  White   to   swap  and   open   the  h   file  for   a   later   rook   incursion   [21.Bxc7?   activates  Black's   rook   21...Rc8   22.Bf4   Nc3   23.Re1   g5  24.Be3   Rxc6   25.Ne5   Bxe5   26.dxe5]   21...b5  22.cxb5   Rxb5   23.Bh3   I   worked   out   that   by  hanging  onto  Pc6   I  delayed  Black  activating  his  rooks   [23.Nxe4?!   fxe4   24.Ne5   g5   25.hxg5   hxg5  26.Bxg5   Bxe5   27.dxe5   and   Black   might   hold;  23.Bxc7?!   Rc8   24.Bf4   Rxc6]   23...Rb6   24.Rc1  Nxd2   25.Nxd2   Bxd4   [25...Rc8   Neither   does  being  passive  save  Black  26.Nf3  Kf7  27.Bf1  Ke7  28.Ra1  Rxc6  29.Ra7  Rc3  30.Kg2  Rc2  31.Bd3  Rc3  32.Ba6   Ra3   33.Bd2   Ra2   34.Bb4+   Kd8   35.Bxc8  Rxa7   36.Bxe6   c6   37.Bc5   Rb7   38.Ne5   Bxe5  39.dxe5  h5  40.Kf3]  26.Nf3  [26.Bxh6?  Ra8  27.Nf3  Bb2]  26...Bb2  [26...e5  27.Bxe5  Bxe5  28.Nxe5  Rf6  29.Bg2]   27.Bxc7   Rb3   [27...Bxc1??   28.Bxb6]  28.Rb1   Rxf3   29.Rxb2   Rc3   30.Bf4   Now   that  tactics   have   forced   favorable   exchanges   White  forces   an   exchange   of   pawns   that   opens   the   h-­‐file  as  an  access  point  for  White's  rook.  [30.Rb6?  Rc8   31.Bf4   g5   32.hxg5   hxg5   33.Bxg5   R3xc6  34.Rb7   R8c7]   30...g5   31.hxg5   hxg5   32.Bxg5  Rxc6  33.Bg2!  The  B  will  go  to  f3,  the  K  to  g2  and  the   Rook   to   the   h-­‐file   33...Kf7   34.Bf3   Kg6  35.Bf4   Rh8   36.Rb1  Kf6   37.Re1  Ra8   38.Kg2   I  have   now   stopped   Black   advancing   his   pawns.  My   plan   is   to   fix   the   P   on   e6   and   if   Black   does  nothing   then   infiltrate   with  my   King.   I   have   to  keep   f2   defended.   38...Ra2   39.Bd1   Ra7  [39...Rca6  40.Be5+  Ke7  41.Rh1  Kd7  42.Rh7+  Kc6  43.Rc7+   Kb6   44.Rc1   Kb7   45.Bh5   Rc6   46.Rb1+  Rb6  47.Rh1  Ra4  48.Be8]  40.Be5+   Ke7   41.Rh1  Ra2   42.Rh7+   Kd8   43.Bh5  Keeps   the   pressure  on   -­‐   if   he   follows   his   computer   he  will   get   into  trouble  43...Rcc2  [43...Rd2?!  44.g4!  fxg4  45.Bxg4  Kc8  46.Re7  Rcc2  47.Bxe6+  Kd8  48.Rf7;  43...Raa6  

6

44.Bf6+   Kc8   45.Re7   Rc7   46.Re8+   Kb7   47.Be5  Rh7   48.Be2   Rc6   49.Bd4   Rh6   50.Kf3]   44.Bd4  The   game   is   pretty   much   over.   White   can  improve  his  pieces,  and  has  the  ability  to  lose  or  gain   tempi.   I   will   gradually   come   to   control  many   more   squares.   44...Kc8   45.Re7   Rc4  46.Bb6   Rc6   47.Be3   Kd8   48.Rh7   Kc8   [48...e5  49.Bg5+   Kc8   50.Rf7]   49.Rh8+   Kc7   50.Bf4+  Kb6   51.Rb8+   Kc5   52.Be8   Rca6   [52...e5  53.Bxe5   Re6   54.Bc7   f4   55.Bxf4   Ree2   56.Kh3  Rxf2  57.Be3+  Kd6  58.Bxf2  Rxf2  59.Bg6]  53.Bd7  Kd4?!   [53...Ra1   54.Bc8   Ra8   55.Rxa8   Rxa8  56.Bxe6  Rf8  57.Bc1  Rf6  58.Bc8  Kd6  59.Bb2  Rf7  60.Kf3   f4   61.g4]   54.Re8   a   series   of   forced  moves   secure   the   win.   54...Re2   55.Bb5   Rea2  56.Bxa6  Rxa6  57.Re7  Rc6  58.Rc7  Ra6  59.Ra7  Rc6   60.Ra1   Ke4   61.Re1+   Kd3   62.Rd1+   Ke2  63.Rd2+  Ke1  64.Kf3  Rc3+  65.Be3  Rb3  66.Rc2  Rb1   67.Rc1+   Rxc1   68.Bxc1   e5   69.Bg5   d4  70.Bf6  e4+  71.Kf4  d3  72.Bd4    1-­‐0      

     O'Hare  SIM  (USA),  Ciaran  (2434)  –    Miettinen  SIM  (USA),  Kristo  (2423)    31.03.2015  [A64]  [O’Hare]  I   have   played   Kristo   several   times   before.   My  impression   was   that   he   relied   heavily   on   his  engine   analysis.   I   was   hoping   for   a   position  where  the  engine  may   lead  him  astray.  He  also  seeks   to   complicate   -­‐   which   creates   winning  chances  for  both  of  us.  The  last  time  we  played  I  had  the  worst  of  the  game  as  Black.    1.d4  Nf6  2.c4  e6  3.g3  For  no  real  good  reason  this   was   my   opening   choice   in   this   tourney.  3...c5   This   unbalances  more  4.d5   d6   [4...exd5  5.cxd5   d6   transposes]   5.Nc3   exd5   6.cxd5   g6  7.Bg2   Bg7   8.Nf3   0-­‐0   9.0-­‐0   Back   to   a   well  known  position  9...Re8  10.Nd2  a6  11.a4  Nbd7  White's   next  move   is   critical  12.h3   a   "rule"   in  the  English  is  "if  you  are  stuck  for  a  move  then  play   h3!"     I   also   had   an   idea   where   the   game  was  going   -­‐   and   I   had   researched   a   new  move  

21

7

for  White  that  altered  what  had  been  favorable  statistics   for   Black   -­‐   one   way   to   catch   a  computer   player!     12...Rb8   [12...Nh5!?  13.Nce4!?   Ndf6   14.Nxf6+   Nxf6   15.Nc4   Ne4=]  13.Nc4   Ne5   [13...Nb6   14.Na3   Bd7   15.e4   Qc7  16.Be3]  14.Na3  Nh5  This  had  been  scoring  well  for  Black  15.e4  Bd7  16.a5    

 16…   Qxa5?!     I   had   been   leading   him   toward  this   sacrificial   variation,   which   is   computer-­‐recommended   but   I   felt   was   flawed.   [Better   is  16...b5   17.axb6   Bb5   18.Naxb5   axb5   19.Nxb5  Qxb6   20.Na3   Qb3   (20...c4   21.Kh2  Qc7˜)  21.Rb1  Qxd1   22.Rxd1   Rb3=]  17.g4   Nf6   18.f4!   Nexg4  19.hxg4  Nxg4  20.f5!  h5  [20...Ne5  was  the  trap  move   that   has   been   almost   refuted.   21.Bg5  (21.f6   Bh8   22.Bg5   Qd8!?)   21...Qc7   22.Nc2   b5]  21.Bg5!  b5  [21...c4!?˜  22.Kh1]  22.Nc4!  [22.Qd2  Qb6   23.f6   Bh8   24.Nd1   c4+   25.Kh1   a5   26.Ne3  Ne5  27.Bh4  a4]  22...Qb4    This   is   a   mistake,   but   Black   thinks   he   has   an  improvement,   that   I   had  anticipated  and  knew  was   poor.   [22...Qc7   23.f6   Bh8   24.Ne3   Ne5  25.Ne2   (25.Nf5   gxf5   26.Qxh5   b4   27.Rf4   Ng6  28.Rh4   Nxh4   29.Bxh4=)   25...b4   26.Nf4   c4  27.Nxh5   c3   28.bxc3   bxc3   29.Nf4   Qc5   30.Qe1  Rb3  31.Qf2  Rb2  32.Qg3=]        23.Nxd6    

 23…  Bd4+?  N  This  is  what  I  hoped  Black  would  play.   It   looks   like   an   improvement   but   is   a  serious  mistake.   It   is   wrong   to   get   the   Bishop  

8

outside  of  the  pawns  in  front  of  the  black  king.  It  should   be   on   f8.   Black   is   in   essence   lost   here.  [Better:  23...Qxb2  24.f6  Bf8  25.Nxe8  Qxc3  26.Nc7  Bd6  27.Rf3  Bh2+  28.Kh1  Qe5  29.Ne6  =]    24.Kh1  Qxb2  25.Ra2!  Qxc3  26.Rf3  Be3?    This  was  the  move  Black  thought  would  give  him  an   advantage.   [26...Ne3   27.Qe2   b4   28.fxg6   fxg6  29.Nxe8   Qc1+   30.Bf1   Bg4   ]   27.fxg6   This   seems  the   most   forcing   way   to   reduce   Black's   options  and  get  the  next  3  White  moves  played.  27...fxg6  The  engines  give  approximate  equality  but  Black  is   lost   after   the   next   forced   moves,   due   to   his  exposed   King.   [27...f5?   28.Bxe3   Nxe3   29.Rxe3  Qxe3   30.Qxh5   Re7   31.Nf7;   27...f6   28.Bxe3   Nxe3  29.Qg1   Qe5   30.Nxe8   (30.Qxe3   Qxd6   31.Raf2   Rf8  32.Qh6  Qe7   33.Qxh5   Qg7   34.e5   f5   35.e6)  30...Ng4  31.Nxf6+   Nxf6   32.Rxa6   Ng4]   28.Bxe3   Nxe3  29.Qg1   Qe5   30.Qxe3   [30.Rxa6?   Ng4   31.Nxe8  Rxe8   32.Rxg6+   Kh7   33.Ra6   Kg8   34.Raa3   c4]  30...Qxd6   31.Raf2   Qe5   [31...Re7   32.Rf6+ñ   Qe5  33.Rxg6+   Rg7ô   34.Rff6   Qa1+   35.Bf1   Rxg6  36.Rxg6+   Kf7   37.Rg1   Qe5]   32.Rf6   Re7ô  33.Rxg6+   Rg7   34.Rff6   Now   a   series   of   “only  moves”…  34...Qa1+  35.Bf1  Rxg6ô  36.Rxg6+  Kf7  37.Rg1  Qe5  38.Rg5  Qd4  39.Qf3+    

Diagram    39...Ke7   40.Qg3   Qf6  41.Be2   Rf8   42.e5  Qf4   43.Rg7+   Kd8ô  44.e6  Qxg3    [44...Bxe6   45.   dxe6  Qxg3  46.e7+]    45.e7+   Kc7   46.  exf8Q   Qe1+   47.Bf1  

Qe4+   48.Kg1   Qd4+   49.Kg2   Qxd5+   [49...h4  50.Qf7   h3+   51.Kh2   Qe5+   52.Rg3]   50.Qf3   Qe5  51.Qg3   Qxg3+   52.Kxg3   Kd6   53.Rg6+   Kd5  54.Rxa6  c4  55.Kf4  Kc5  56.Ra7  Be6  57.Ke3    With   no   pawns   left   White   has   to   win   Black's  pawns  without   letting   any   get   too   far   advanced.  [57.Rh7??   Kd4   58.Re7   Bd5   59.Re1   Bf7   60.Re4+  Kc3   61.Re7   Bg6   62.Ke3   Bf5   63.Re5]   57...Kb4  58.Kd4   h4   59.Re7   Bg4   60.Re4   Bd1   [60...c3  61.Rxg4   c2   62.Kd3+   Kb3]  61.Rxh4   Bc2   62.Rh8  Bf5   63.Bh3   Bb1   64.Bd7   c3   65.Rc8   c2   66.Rc3  Black  Resigns  [66.Rc3  Ka5  67.Kc5  b4  68.Rc4]      1-­‐0  

22

6

Spassky–Korchnoi USSR Ch.1955. White is winning in any case, but teenager Spassky played the novel 41.Qh2! 1-0

Larsen–Spassky, USSR vs. Rest of the World. Leningrad 1970.

Black has already sacrificed a Knight on g4. How does he continue the attack? 14…Rh1!! And the game

finished 15.Rxh1 g2 16.Rf1 (16.Rg1 Qh4+ 17.Kd1 Qh1! -+) 16…Qh4+ 17.Kd1 gxf1=Q+ 0-1. After 18.Bxf1 Bxg4+ Be2 (18…Kc1 Qe1+) 18…Qh1#.

Andruet–Spassky, Bundesliga, 1988

Here Spassky played the shocking 28…Qf3!! 0-1. After the forced 29.gxf3 Nexf3+ 30.Kh1 comes the quiet move, 30…Bh3! and white’s

pieces can only lookon helplessly as ...Bg2 mate cannot be stopped.

Spassky scored 44 wins, 12 draws and one loss over two nights in Dallas. I believe he quickly recognized the stronger players and was happy to offer them draws. Who wouldn’t take a draw against a World Champion?

His one loss came on the second night against Dallas expert Robert Weinberg. Boris told me that this was his only loss on the entire American tour to that point, and he by then had been to both coasts and Chicago.

A lighthearted moment came in the middle of the evening when Spassky arrived at the

7

board of a local Class B player. Norm, (not his real name) slammed a piece down on the board and cried “CHECKMATE!” We were all startled and I dashed over to the board just in time to hear Boris politely explaining to Norm that he couldn’t give checkmate while his own King was still in check!

After the exhibition I drove Spassky home and got ready to pay him, but I had a brain freeze. In all the excitement of the evening, I could not for the life of me remember where I had put the $2,500. I was convinced I had dropped it in the parking lot of the hotel. In a state of panic looked all over the house, called the Marriott to see if it had been turned in and prepared to head back to the hotel to search.

Spassky, unbelievably, remained cool, saying, “Lou, don’t worry. If the money doesn’t show up, it’s all right. I’ve had a wonderful stay in Dallas. If you find the money, you can send it to me.” A short time later I got into my car to drive back to the hotel, and abruptly remembered I’d stashed it in the “secret compartment” in the car. The following night, the receipts never left my pocket.

I didn’t play any chess against Boris, but he was willing to play all comers on the afternoon of the reception at my house. He gave 5 to 3 minute time odds, but never was in time trouble and didn’t come close to losing or drawing a game. He played chess in the same calm and unruffled way he did everything else. Spassky never moved erratically, never slammed a piece down on the board, and never changed his facial expression. But he never took more than a few seconds to make a move.

Boris Spassky played skittles games against FM John Jacobs while casually sipping wine. Jacobs, an up and coming junior when Spassky beat Petrosian for the world championship in 1969, told me later, “I couldn’t think of any moves, the only thing I could think about was, “I’m playing Spassky.”

On his final night in Dallas, Boris and I sat quietly in my living room and listened to a recording of Beethoven’s “Appassionata” piano sonata. He was more than a World Champion.

…Continued from page 4

23

8

Spassky was a man of the world, a renaissance man, savoring life one day at a time.

In a 2014 interview, Spassky, then 77 years old, commented, “In general, what a chess player needs has always been the same, with a love of chess the main requirement. Moreover, it has to be loved naturally, with passion, the way people love art, drawing and music. That passion possesses you and seeps into you. I still look at chess with the eyes of a child.”

Six years after his visit to Dallas, Spassky played another match against his friend, Bobby Fischer. Boris lost the match (10-5), but still pocketed $1.65 million.

A few weeks following Spassky’s Dallas visit, several of us who entertained him received thank you notes from Paris, where Boris lived

9

at the time. Everybody loved this gracious gentleman – the chess players, the women, even the waiters in restaurants.

Thirty years later I warmly remember Spassky’s visit as though it happened yesterday.

Spassky’s brilliant King’s Gambit attacking win over Bronstein was later immortalized in the 1963 James Bond movie “From Russia With Love” whose villain was a devious grandmaster named Kronsteen. To show his Machiavellian brilliance they portrayed him winning the last few moves of this Spassky game against a fictional Canadian grandmaster. See the video clip of this here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdCo8UVxeXU

Spassky — Bronstein, Leningrad, 1960

1. e4 e5 2. f4 ef4 3. Nf3 d5 4. ed5 Bd6 5. Nc3 Ne7 6. d4 O-O 7. Bd3 Nd7 8. O-O h6 9. Ne4 Nd5 10. c4 Ne3 11. Be3 fe3 12. c5 Be7 13. Bc2 Re8 14. Qd3 e2 15. Nd6 Nf8 16. Nf7 ef1Q 17. Rf1 Bf5 18. Qf5 Qd7 19. Qf4 Bf6 20. N3e5 Qe7 21. Bb3 Be5 22. Ne5+ Kh7 23. Qe4+ 1-0

Spassky vs Fischer in 1970.

24

7

disadvantage. Black should play 24 … Be3+ followed by ...Bd4, placing the bishop on a strong post. But there’s no immediate tactical follow-up, which may have discouraged him since that seems to be what he has been waiting for.

25.Bd2 (?) White “double clutches” on a throw deep into the red zone! While allowing 25. Rb6 Be3+ 26. Kh1 Nh5 might look a little scary, Black doesn’t have enough firepower on the kingside to follow up there effectively. Instead, White gives Black a chance to at least trade off pieces and make the defense of a5 more difficult to defend.

25...g5?? A blunder. Black blocks in his own bishop and creates more weaknesses on the kingside. The idea of a kingside buildup is shut down by White’s reply. After a long set of moves that seemed to be “waiting for a blunder,” Black instead commits one himself!

26.g4! This move locks up the kingside, meaning the only active play to be found is on the b-file, where White is in full control.

26...Kg7 27.Na4 Nd7 28.Rb3 Rb8 29.Rab1 Bb7 30.R1b2 Ba8 31.Qb1

It’s always fun to see the Alekhine's gun! Note how harmoniously coordinated White’s pieces have become due to his following the plan of opening and controlling the b-file. 31...Rxb3 32.Rxb3 Rb8 33.Nb6! Nxb6 Giving up, but the infiltration on the b-file

8

means that with meaningful play — which White has already shown in getting here — the first player is in control. There’s not even a good desperation option to recommend here now that the kingside is blocked up. The b-file has fallen, and with it, the game.

If Black thought there was a way to blockade the b-pawn in the endgame, he was mistaken. The b-pawn is running toward the end zone, and the bishop is swinging around to give a lead block to the last defender on b7.

37...Kf6 38.Ba4 e6 39.Bc6 Bc8 40.dxe6 Kxe6 41.b7 Bxb7 42.Bxb7, Kf6 43.Bxa6 Bf8 44.Ba5 Be7 45.Kf2 h6 46.Ke3 Kg6 47.Kd3 h5 48.Kc3 hxg4 49.hxg4 Kf7 50.Bc8 Ke8 51.Bf5 Bd8 52.Bxd8 Kxd8 53.Kb3 Kc7 54.Ka4 Kb7 55.Kb5 Kc7 56.Ka6 Kc6 57.Bc8 Kc7 58.Bb7 Kd8 59.Kb6 Kd7 60.Bd5 Kd8 61.Kc6 Ke7 62.Kc7 Kf6 63.Kxd6 Kg6 64.Kxe5 1-0. Instead of the bad habit of making natural moves while waiting for the blunder, the way to challenge stronger players and thus raise your rating is to learn how to aggressively execute the plan that is in accordance with position — while still keeping alert for tactics. Naturally, this is difficult. But making some sort of attempt at positive, purposeful action is always preferable. Find a plan, improve your pieces when possible, and play with purpose every move.

After breaking up White’s center, I continued to pursue a purposeful development that left me with a strong initiative that I managed to convert into a point against a tough player.

…Continued from page 8

25

9

Chuck Johnson (1934)- John Cope (1987) 2nd Chess-Saturday Invitational (11.2.2013)

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. Qb3 dxc4 6. Qxc4 0-0 7. e4 Nc6 8. Be2 Bg4 9. Be3 Bxf3 10. gxf3 e5 11. d5 Nd4

12. Nb5 c6 13. dxc6 Nxc6 14. Bc5?! Chuck declines the pawn sac and instead aggressively tries to tie up my pieces. But like before, the drawbacks of this move are only exploitable if I’m willing to give up something myself, at least temporarily. Pushing for a win, White has been ignoring development. It’s a cue he is overextended. Thus my plan is to push them back and emerge with the initiative. As such, my plan over the next few moves relies on the specific position of my

14 … a6! The only route to an advantage. 14 … Re8 is clunky and allows Chuck to continue development with gain of time. I am not actually offering a sacrifice here due to

10

tactical resources, but I don’t have forever here — my moves need to carry direct threats at this point to ensure White won’t have time to carry out his own plans. Only in this way can I prevent Chuck getting control of d6 and the d-file in general, which would hamper my pieces. 15. Nc3 b5! 16. Qd3 Qxd3 17. Bxd3 Rfd8 My manipulation of the position’s tactics allows me time to vacate a better square for the rook. Black has a clear plan of continuing to pressure White’s position, thanks to the somewhat clunky placement of the White pieces and Black’s lead in development, but this requires me to keep my eye on the ball. Black’s main advantage here is time, and shillyshallying would only allow White to catch up in development and be okay. As such, playing with threats will be a major theme over the next few moves. My primary goal is to exploit his awkwardly placed bishop on c5, which doesn’t have a good home. I want to control it and increase pressure on it. 18. Be2 Nd4 19. Bd1 Rd7!? It’s worth a reminder here that sometimes there’s a tricky balance between preventing your opponent’s ideas and making the moves most likely to complete your own plans. If Chuck can plant a knight on d5, it will be a strong piece, disrupting the optimal placement of

20. a4!? Rc8 21. Ba3

21…Rc4!

26

11

22. axb5 axb5 23. Na2 The bishop is saved, but at the expense of awkward placement. Black must now find a plan to increase the advantage. 23. …Nh5 Since White’s knight no longer threatens to jump to d5 immediately, I can take a move to improve my own pieces. The timing of this has to be precise — in this case, after White’s knight has abandoned the center — because my plan is so reliant on keeping White bottled up through tactical threats. All it takes is one oversight to lose most of my advantage. 24. b3 Rc8 25. Nb4 Nf4!

26. 0-0 Bf8!

27. Na6

threats finally prove too much: 27 … Bxa3 28. Rxa3 Ra7! 0-1

Even here I can’t expect the game to win

12

itself. 28 … Ra8? might initially appear virtually identical to 28…Ra7, but if 28… Ra8 Chuck could muddy the waters with 29. Nc5, getting out of the pin with a counterattack on d7. Strong players can often use such a resource to turn a game around, so tactical vigilance is always needed until the end. If a quarterback making a bad throw is frustrating, throwing an interception in the endzone after a long and successful drive is infuriating!

I hope the games and discussion above have shed light on how planless, “waiting for a blunder” play is a bad habit that the intermediate player must overcome in order to improve and get more satisfaction from chess. Watch for this pitfall in your own games, and try to play with a plan. Following an effective plan puts pressure on your opponent and might even prompt a mistake you can exploit. But even if your opponent doesn’t make a mistake, achieving a plan can net you the advantage anyway — just like Aaron Rodgers can often complete a pass even against tight double coverage. I hope you’ll find the narrow throwing lane and zip the football into it properly, at least in most of your games. Until next time, good luck in your chess endeavors!